Parashat Chukat, 5772, 2012: No Act of Kindness Goes UnrewardedRabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra, my sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, and Shifra bat Chaim Alter, the refuah shlaimah of Yosef Shmuel ben Miriam, Yehonatan Binyamin Halevy ben Golda Friedel, and Moshe Reuven ben Chaya, and in honor of the joyous birth of a baby girl to my children, Devorah and Zevie Burger. We are all familiar with the popular sardonic quote: “No good deed goes unpunished.” It has been attributed to several well-known individuals including the British playwright, Oscar Wilde (1854-1900), the American banker and philanthropist, Andrew Mellon (1855-1937), and the Academy Awards winning Jewish Austro-Hungarian born American filmmaker, artist, and journalist, Billy Wilder (1906-2002). In essence this wry quote means that no mater how positively envisioned, a would-be good deed will more often than not have negative ramifications and, thereby, be punished. Judaism, however, takes a decidedly different stance to even positive thoughts, let alone the performance of actual exemplary deeds: The Holy One Blessed be He accounts positive thoughts (machshava tovah) as if they had achieved complete fruition (Tosefta, Masechet Peah, Lieberman ed., I:4) Positive thoughts are combined with actual actions [thereby enhancing the depth and meaning of the action] (Talmud Yerushalmi, Peah, Chapter I) Good intention is combined with deed, for it is said: “Then they that feared the L-rd spoke one with another: and the L-rd hearkened, and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before Him, for them that feared the L-rd, and that thought upon His name.” [Sefer Malachi 3:16] Now, what is the meaning of “that thought upon His name?” — Said R. Assi: “Even if one [merely] thinks of performing a commandment but is forcibly prevented [from doing so,] the Torah ascribes it to him as though he has performed it.” (Talmud Bavli, Kiddushin 40a, translation, Soncino Talmud, with my emendations) Our parasha contains the fascinating example of Og, the King of Bashan, whose intentions regarding a particular act were stepped in evil - even though the act itself resulted in a positive outcome. We first encounter Og in Sefer Bereishit 14:13, where, according to Midrashic tradition, it was he who informed Avram (Avraham) of his nephew Lot’s capture: And the fugitive came and he told Abram the Hebrew, and he was living in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, the brother of Eshkol and the brother of Aner, who were Abram's confederates. (This and all Tanach and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach) Rashi (1040-1105) summarized the relevant Midrashim on this verse, and simultaneously revealed Og’s true intentions: “And the fugitive came”: According to its simple meaning, this was Og, who escaped from the battle, and that is what is referred to in (Sefer Devarim 3:11): “Only Og survived from the rest of the Rephaim.” And that is the meaning of “survived,” that Amraphel and his allies did not kill him when they smote the Rephaim in Ashteroth-Karnaim [Midrash Tanchuma, Chukat 25]. The Midrash Bereishit Rabbah [explains]: “This is Og, who escaped from the Generation of the Flood, and this is the meaning of “from the rest of the Rephaim,” as it is said: (above 6: 4):“The Nephilim were on the earth, etc.” And he [Og] intended that Abram should be killed and he would marry Sarah (Midrash Bereishit Rabbah 42:8).Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah 19:32, re-emphasized Og’s intention to have Avram killed so that he could marry Sarah, and added a crucial detail for understanding Og’s story and our overall topic: “The Holy One Blessed be He gave him [i.e. Og] reward for his journey [to Avram] and he, therefore, lived an inordinate amount of time…” Given the Midrash’s portrayal of the “story behind the story,” we are now ready to examine the underlying meaning of two quizzical pasukim (verses) in our parasha: Then they [i.e. the Jewish people] turned and headed north toward the Bashan. Og, the king of Bashan, came out toward them with all his people, to wage war at Edrei. The L-rd said to Moses, “Do not fear him, for I have delivered him, his people, and his land into your hand. You shall do to him as you did to Sihon the king of the Amorites who dwells in Heshbon.” (Sefer Bamidbar 21:34-35) We are initially stymied by Hashem’s declaration to Moshe: “Do not fear him [Og], for I have delivered him, his people, and his land into your hand.” After all, it would appear that Og was a relatively minor impediment on our ancestor’s grand journey to the Promised Land, especially when viewed from the vantage points of the Exodus and the Splitting of the Sea of Reeds! Why, then, did Moshe need this direct statement and reassurance of Hashem’s protection? Didn’t he already know that the Schechinah (Divine Presence) was constantly protecting the Jewish people? Once again, Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah helps us to understand the source of Moshe’s fear and the reasoning inherent in Hashem’s declaration to him: When Moshe came to wage war [against Og,] he was overcome by fear and he said: “I am 120 years old, and this one [i.e. Og] is over 500 years old! If he did not have [great] merit, he never would have lived for all these years!” [Therefore,] the Holy One Blessed be He said to Moshe: “Do not fear him [Og], for I have delivered him, his people, and his land into your hand. You shall do to him as you did to Sihon the king of the Amorites who dwells in Heshbon.” (Ibid.) Here, too, Rashi’s commentary on our above-stated pasuk further clarifies Moshe’s trepidation regarding Og: “Do not fear him”: Moses was afraid to fight [against him] lest the merit of Abraham advocate for him, as it says, “The refugee came” (Sefer Bereishit 14:13) - this was Og who had escaped from the Rephaim, who were smitten by Chedorlaomer and his allies at Ashteroth Karnaim, as it says, “only Og, the king of Bashan, was left of the remnant of the Rephaim” (Sefer Devarim 3:11). - [Midrash Tanchuma Chukat 24, Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah 19:32] Given all of the above-cited sources, and Rashi’s trenchant analyses, let us now summarize “the story of Og”:

Og lived a highly unusual amount of time, perhaps as long as 500 years. This length of time was unheard of after the Great Flood that had destroyed the world.

Og was the fugitive who survived a huge battlefield conflagration and informed Avram that his nephew, Lot, had been captured during the course of the battle.

Og’s intention upon informing Avram of Lot’s capture was diabolical in nature. His plan and goal were quite simple: Have Avram leave his stronghold, and go to war so that he could be killed in the subsequent battle. Afterwards, he would steal Sarah away and “marry her.”

Even though Og’s intentions were totally malevolent in nature, the outcome of his actual act was wholly positive: Avram saved Lot and his extended family was complete once again.

Hashem judged Og’s act as ultimately meritorious. Thus, he was rewarded with long-life and great power as the King of Bashan.

HaRav Yaakov Moshe Charlop zatzal (1883-1951) was, perhaps, Rav Avraham Yitzhak Kook’s zatzal (1865–1935) greatest disciple. He developed a profound practical lesson from Og’s story from which we can all learn: There is a great lesson that may be derived from this story: Even though Og’s intention was pure evil – i.e. that Avraham should be killed in the war and then he [Og] would take Sarah – nonetheless, since his action resulted in a positive outcome for Avraham, it was considered to be a meritorious act of great distinction for him (nechshav hadavar l’Og l’zechut gadolah). Thus, Moshe was afraid of him [Og] – since he also had the merit of Avraham on his side. As a result, the Holy One Blessed be He reassured Moshe and explicitly told him not to be afraid. From all of this we may see [i.e. derive] the greatness of any act of kindness – even if the intention behind the act was woefully wanting. With Hashem’s help, may each of us be zocheh (merit) to perform acts of kindness (chesed) that are authentic both in their intention and performance. Then, perhaps, we will finally see the fulfillment of King David’s stirring words in Sefer Tehillim 89:3: “For I said, ‘Forever will it [i.e. the world] be built with kindness; as the heavens, with which You will establish Your faithfulness.’” V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email rdbe718@gmail.com. My audio shiurim on Tefilah and Haskafah may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/7sp5vt3*** I have recently posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. They are available here: http://tinyurl.com/82pgvfn. **Follow new postings on my Twitter accounts: @theRavZatzal and @Torahtech613.

Parashat Korach, 5772, 2012: Understanding the Motivations Behind Korach’s Rebellion Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra, my sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, and Shifra bat Chaim Alter, and the refuah shlaimah of Yosef Shmuel ben Miriam, Yehonatan Binyamin Halevy ben Golda Friedel, and Moshe Reuven ben Chaya. Korach’s rebellion is very difficult to understand. At first blush, it seems that anyone with the least bit of G-d-consciousness should have been able to recognize that this revolt was, in fact, an uprising against Hashem. The mutiny against Moshe and Aharon, while crucial and fundamental, was actually a ruse. It was merely the human terms in which Korach couched his insurrection against G-d. Rashi (1040-1105), basing himself upon several Midrashim, makes this point quite clearly in his commentary to Sefer Bamidbar 16:11:Therefore: Because of this, “you and your entire company who are assembled” with you “are against the L-rd,” for I acted as His messenger to give the kehunah (priesthood) to Aaron, and this rebellion is not with us [but with the L-rd]. - [Midrash Tanchuma Korach 6, Numbers Rabbah 18:9] (This, and all Torah and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, emphasis my own) Rashi further notes that Korach was blessed with a prodigious intellect (Sefer Bamidbar 16:7). Why then did Korach repudiate G-d’s authority and rebel against Him? Rashi answers this, as well, in his trenchant analysis of Korach’s motives: But what did Korach, who was astute, see [to commit] this folly? His vision deceived him. He saw [prophetically] a chain of great people descended from him: Samuel, who is equal [in importance] to Moses and Aaron. He [Korach] said, “For his sake I will be spared.” [He also saw] twenty-four watches [of Levites] emanating from his grandsons, all prophesying through the holy spirit, as it says, “all these were the sons of Heman” (I Chron 25:5). He said, “Is it possible that all this greatness is destined to emanate from me, and I should remain silent?” Therefore, he participated [in the rebellion] to reach that prerogative, for he had heard from Moses that they would all perish and one would escape [death]: “the one whom the L-rd chooses - he is the holy one.” He erred in thinking that it referred to him. He, however, did not “see” properly, for his sons repented [and thus did not die at that time]. Moses, however, foresaw this. - [This is found in Midrash Tanchuma, Korach 5, Numbers Rabbah 18:8] (Emphasis my own) Rashi’s explanation of Korach’s seemingly inexplicable behavior goes a long way toward providing us with a conceptual framework for understanding these actions. It also fills in an essential detail that is the “real story behind the story.” Korach was blessed with nevuah (prophecy); i.e. G-d vouchsafed His glorious visions to him. Therefore, Korach’s view of the future was an accurate one – Samuel the prophet would, indeed, be his heir. Little wonder then, that Korach erred and mistakenly believed that the future belonged to him, rather than to Moshe. He misinterpreted his prophetic vision as representing the eclipse of Moshe’s sun and the catapulting of his own star to the highest heights of the firmament. As we know, however, nothing could have been further from the truth. Korach’s sons did teshuvah (repented) and ultimately were the progenitors of future generations. Thus, they had a brilliant future, while Korach was literally buried alive as a result of his actions. In my opinion, a major question begs to be asked: “How did Korach err so grievously if he was so wise and capable of receiving d’var Hashem (G-d’s directs words)?” Stated quite simply, how did Korach “not get it?” In my view, his gaavat halev (arrogance) blinded him to the realities with which he was presented. No matter how brilliant and far-seeing he was, his ego and blind ambition prevented him from perceiving the truth. This is precisely why the Rambam (1135-1204) warns us so insistently regarding the insidious trait of arrogance: There are some moral qualities wherein it is forbidden to take the middle approach. Instead, one should adopt one of the extremes of such temperaments. One of these is the temperament of arrogance. It is not good [enough] for one to be just modest, but one should be meek, and one's spirits should be low. Therefore, concerning Moses our Teacher it is written, “...very meek,” and not just, “meek.” Therefore, the Sages commanded that one should be exceedingly meek. They said further that anyone who raises his spirits [in a haughty fashion] is denying G-d’s essence, as it is written, “...then your heart be lifted up and you forget the L-rd your G-d.” They also said that all those with arrogant airs should be excommunicated, even if they are only slightly arrogant. (Hilchot Deot 2:3, O’Levy translation with my emendations) Korach simply did not understand the crucial nature of anivut (humility). Therefore, he did not, and perhaps could not, appreciate that Moshe’s greatness was a direct product of his anivut. Korach’s woefully inadequate perception of Moshe’s true qualities was his the cause of his ultimate downfall. In a very real sense, Korach’s story is a truly tragic one. It is the tale of squandered spiritual potential, misunderstanding, arrogance, and unfettered ambition. Korach rejected humility, and embraced gaavat halev. Like a malevolent worm, this gaavah burrowed deep into every fiber of his being and prevented him from achieving even a part of what he could have become. In short, Korach was his own worst enemy. Korach’s motivations and actions are, in reality, a study in what we ought not to do if we are to be true avdei Hashem (G-d’s servants). Dovid Hamelech (King David), in Psalm 45:5, a psalm from the sons of Korach (b’nei Korach), depicts the greatness and humility that is a singular trait of true Torah scholars: “And in your [i.e. the Torah scholar’s] majesty ride prosperously on in the cause of truth and righteous humility (v’anavah tzedek), and it shall instruct you so that your right hand shall perform awesome things.” (Emendations my own) King David connects v’anavah tzedek directly to Korach’s children and all his future offspring. In doing so, the Psalmist is teaching us that they recognized and understood how to serve Hashem. In truth, b’nei Korach were wiser and more prescient than their father – even if they did not receive prophecy directly from the Master of the Universe. May Hashem give us the wisdom to be like b’nei Korach, rather than Korach. May He give us the ability to choose anavah tzedek and reject gaavat halev. If we can achieve this lofty, but accessible goal, we will be on the path to being authentic avdei Hashem. V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email rdbe718@gmail.com. My audio shiurim on Tefilah and Haskafah may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/7sp5vt3*** I have recently posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. They are available here: http://tinyurl.com/82pgvfn. **Follow new postings on my Twitter accounts: @theRavZatzal and @Torahtech613.

In the beginning of our parasha, we encounter 12 mighty and prestigious leaders of the Jewish people:

These are their names: For the tribe of Reuben, Shammua the son of Zakkur.For the tribe of Simeon, Shaphat the son of Hori. For the tribe of Judah, Caleb the son of Jepphunneh. For the tribe of Issachar, Yigal the son of Joseph. For the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea the son of Nun. For the tribe of Benjamin, Palti the son of Raphu. For the tribe of Zebulun, Gaddiel the son of Sodi. For the tribe of Joseph, the tribe of Manasseh, Gaddi the son of Susi. For the tribe of Dan, Ammiel the son of Gemalli. For the tribe of Asher, Sethur the son of Michael. For the tribe of Naphtali, Nahbi the son of Vophsi. For the tribe of Gad, Geuel the son of Machi. (Sefer Bamidbar 13:4-15, translation, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)

These great tribal princes are called “anashim” (“men”) which, as Rashi (1040-1105) notes in his commentary based on Midrash Tanchuma to Sefer Bamidbar 13:3, was an honorific appellation: “Every instance of the term anashim that appears in the text of the Torah is a term of distinction [literally, importance]. At that time they were righteous.” (Translation my own) These men were unquestionably the great leaders of the Dor Hamidbar (the Generation of the Desert). Their task in reference to the Land of Israel,was defined as one of exploring, searching, examining, and discovery. Therefore, in 13:2, 13: 21, and 13:25, we find the expressions “v’yaturu,” “vayaturu,” and “meture” respectively. So, too, do we find the infinitive form of this verb “latur” (to seek out or to discover) in verse 13:16.

Somehow, something went terribly wrong. Somehow, these great leaders, with the exception of Caleb and Hoshea (Joshua), ceased to be anashim and morphed into something quite different: meraglim (spies). This transformation is clearly represented in the first chapter of Sefer Devarim 20-24:

And I [Moses] said to you, “You have come to the mountain of the Amorites, which the L-d, our G-d, is giving us. Behold, the L-d, your G-d, has set the land before you; go up and possess it, as the L-d, G-d of your fathers has spoken to you; you shall neither fear nor be dismayed.” And all of you approached me and said, “Let us send men ahead of us so that they will search out the land for us and bring us back word by which route we shall go up, and to which cities we shall come.” And the matter pleased me [Moses]; so I took twelve men from you, one man for each tribe. And they turned and went up to the mountain, and they came to the valley of Eshkol and spied it out. (Translation, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, emphasis my own).

The Meraglim failed to keep the proper perspective. They squandered the greatest opportunity in human history. Instead of fulfilling their mission, the Torah explicitly states that the men spied out the land (v’yiraglu otah), rather than exploring or discovering it. If they had lived up to their potential, Moshe would have led our forefathers into Eretz Yisrael, he would have been the Mashiach (Messiah), the permanent Beit Hamikdash (Holy Temple) would have been built, and the storied history of our people replete with its trials and tribulations would never have come to pass. We would have lived in the times of the Mashiach, instead of waiting for him for millennia.

What transformed these great and noble men, these universally recognized leaders, into mere “spies?” My rebbi and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), suggested that their grievous error and subsequent downfall resulted from their radical misconception and consequent misperception of the nature of the Land of Israel. This is best viewed in contrast to the manner in which Moshe perceived Eretz Yisrael:

Moses regarded the land not only in a political or physical light, but also as an exalted everlasting union. A singular segulah people, special to G-d, was being joined to a singular land, from which G-d’s attention is never withdrawn. Destinies were being joined…

Moses expected the scouts to note the segulah singularity of the land, to perceive its worthiness in terms of Abraham’s covenant with G-d.

Rabbi Soloveitchik noted that the Meraglim acted in total contradistinction to Moshe’s perception of Eretz Yisrael:

They explored the area from the desert of Zin to Rehob, leading to Hamath, but they viewed the land as one would appraise property. Their report was that of spies, not that of scouts; they balanced debits against credits and declared the entire enterprise hopeless. With grandeur looking down on them, all they could see was the mundane. (Reflections of the Rav, Vol. I, pages 122-123)

The Meraglim had the opportunity and obligation to recognize the singular nature of the Promised Land, and to view it as an everlasting covenant between Hashem and our people. Tragically, however, they perceived it in purely naturalistic and militaristic terms. Thus they failed in their ultimate mandate - to recognize the kedushah (holiness) and G-d given nature of Eretz Yisrael.

Let us now, however, revisit the very beginning of our parasha, when Hashem first acceded to Moshe’s request to send men to examine every aspect of Eretz Yisrael. The first and second verses of our Torah reading, state the following:

The L-rd spoke to Moses saying, “Send out for yourself men who will scout the Land of Canaan, which I am giving to the children of Israel. You shall send one man each for his father's tribe; each one shall be a chieftain in their midst.”

Rashi immediately notes that Hashem had no interest in sending these men to Eretz Yisrael. Instead, he allowed Moshe to do so:

Send for yourself According to your own understanding. I am not commanding you, but if you wish, you may send. Since the Israelites had come [to Moses] and said, “Let us send men ahead of us,” as it says, “All of you approached me…” (Deut. 1:22) [Midrash Tanchuma 5] (Translation, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, emphasis my own)

In “the best of all worlds,” Hashem would have wanted the Jewish people to have had the depth of faith-commitment whereby they simply would have believed that just as Hashem had taken them out from Egypt with wonders and miracles, and on the “wings of eagles “ (Sefer Shemot 19:4), so too would He bring them to Eretz Yisrael. This notion is clearly expressed in Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah 17:7:

What does the Torah mean when it states: “Send for yourself men?” This means it was the Jewish people who wanted this. At the very moment wherein they were about to inherit the land, Hashem said to them: “Behold, the L-rd, your G-d, has set the land before you; go up and possess it, as the L-rd, G-d of your fathers has spoken to you; you shall neither fear nor be dismayed." [Sefer Devarim 1:21] At that moment, all of the Jewish people surrounded Moshe: “And all of you approached me and said, ‘Let us send men ahead of us so that they will search out the land for us…’ This proves they did not believe in Him (elah shelo he’eminu) (Translation and emphasis my own)

There is, however, a further textual nuance and subtlety of language that needs to be examined in the phrase “Send for yourself men.” We have clearly seen that the Midrash saw the act of sending the princes as nothing other than a manifestation of the people’s chisaron emunah (lack of faith). Sending these men eventuated in a disaster of untold proportion, and one that echoes throughout the annals of history until our own moment in time. Who should have been sent instead? Whose exploration of the Land would not have been seen as a chisaron emunah? The answer is deceptively simple: Moshe should have sent women!

While this may sound like a radical feminist thought that is a by-product of our modern politically correct era, nothing could be further than the truth. The origin of this idea is found in the famous 16th century Torah commentary of Rabbi Shlomo Ephraim of Luntchitz (1550-1619) that is known as the Kli Yakar:

Another explanation as to why the Torah specifies “anashim” (“men”): Our Sages of blessed memory [in Midrash Yalkut Shimoni, Parashat Pinchas] noted that the men despised the Land and stated: “’Let us appoint a leader and return to Egypt’ (Sefer Bamidbar 14:4). [In contrast,] the women loved the Land and said: ‘Give us a permanent portion’ (ibid. 27:4). Therefore, the Holy One Blessed Be He said: ‘According to My opinion, since I see what the future will bring, it is far better to send women that love the land for they will not speak about it in a disparaging and negative manner. But you, [Moshe], believe that these men are in fact fine and upstanding individuals (kesharim), and you believe that the Land is beloved to them – Go ahead and send men!’” This is why when the Torah writes: “Send for yourself men,” [Rashi] interprets it as “According to your own understanding,” as for Me [i.e. G-d], however, it would have been far better to send women as has been stated. (Translation and emphasis my own)

This amazing statement of Rav Luntchitz speaks volumes about the essential holiness and unique character of the Jewish woman. Remember, it was the Jewish women who refused to give up hope and, amid the misery and backbreaking labor of Egypt, encouraged their husbands in kedushah and taharah (purity) to bring another generation of Jews into the world. In addition, it was the Jewish women who steadfastly refused to participate in the Egel Hazahav (the incident of the Golden Calf). Little wonder, then, that it would have been the Jewish women who would have set the stage for our grand entrance into Eretz Yisrael, with Moshe as Mashiach - if they had only been given the chance!

Shabbat Shalom

Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org

The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email rdbe718@gmail.com.

“Remember what G-d did to Miriam on your way out of Egypt,” (Sefer Devarim 24:9) recounts Miriam’s punishment for slandering her younger brother, Moshe. The actual textual presentation of this event occurs in our parasha:

Miriam and Aaron began speaking against Moses because of the dark-skinned woman he had married. The woman that [Moses] had married was indeed dark-skinned. They [then went on to] say, “Is it to Moses exclusively that G-d speaks? Doesn't He also speak to us?” G-d heard it. Moses, however, was very humble, more so than any man on the face of the earth. G-d suddenly said to Moses, Aaron and Miriam, “All three of you go out to the Communion Tent!” When the three of them went out, G-d descended in a pillar of cloud and stood at the Tent's entrance. He summoned Aaron and Miriam, and both of them went forth. [G-d] said, “Listen carefully to My words. If someone among you experiences divine prophecy, then when I make Myself known to him in a vision, I will speak to him in a dream. This is not true of My servant Moses, who is like a trusted servant throughout My house. With him I speak face to face, in a vision not containing allegory, so that he sees a true picture of G-d. How can you not be afraid to speak against My servant Moses?” G-d displayed anger against them and departed. When the cloud left its place over the Tent, Miriam was leprous, white like snow. When Aaron returned to Miriam [and saw] her leprous, Aaron said to Moses, “Please, my lord, do not hold a grudge against us for acting foolishly and sinning. Let [Miriam] not be like a stillborn child, who comes from the womb with half its flesh rotted away.” Moses cried out to G-d, “O G-d, please heal her!” (Sefer Bamidbar 12:1-13, translation, Rav Aryeh Kaplan zatzal)

What caused Miriam, one of our seven great prophetesses, (Talmud Bavli, Megilah 14a) to speak lashon harah (slander) against her beloved brother? After all, she recognized him as the true leader of klal Yisrael (the Jewish People), that is, as Moshe Rabbeinu (Our teacher). While it certainly does not exonerate her behavior, it appears that she was swayed and overcome by her heartfelt emotions on behalf of her sister-in-law, Tzipporah. According to Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 87a, Moshe had ceased to fulfill his conjugal obligations to his wife following the Revelation at Mount Sinai. This is something that he initially decided to do by himself. Afterwards, he received Hashem’s approval for having done so. Rashi (1040-1105), based upon Midrash Tanchumah to Parashat Tzav (13), relates the manner by which Miriam realized what Moshe had done, and the consequent pain and suffering it caused Tzipporah:

Miriam and Aaron spoke She spoke first, [and was, therefore, the one who was punished]. Therefore, Scripture mentions her first. How did she know that Moses had separated from his wife? R. Nathan says: Miriam was beside Zipporah when Moses was told that Eldad and Medad were prophesying in the camp. When Zipporah heard this, she said, “Woe to their wives if they are required to prophesy, for they will separate from their wives just as my husband separated from me.” From this, Miriam knew [about it] and told Aaron. (Translation, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, brackets my own)

Although, Miriam and Aharon had no intention of harming Moshe, they most surely did so. Their behavior led, perforce, to a diminution of Moshe’s greatness in the eyes of the Jewish people. As Rashi explains: “Now if Miriam, who did not intend to disparage him [Moses] was punished, all the more so someone who [intentionally] disparages his fellow.” Rashi’swords should be viewed as a spiritual “wake-up” call to each of us. His conclusion is crystal clear: We must be particularly conscientious in our attempts to avoid speaking lashon harah.

Chazal (Our Sages of blessed memory) spoke about lashon harah throughout the Talmud. One page, however, is a mini-encyclopedia of their attitudes regarding this subject. Talmud Bavli, Arakin 15b presents numerous statements regarding this most heinous of aveirot (prohibitions). Allow me to share a few examples with you: “Rabbi Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Yossi ben Zimra:’ Anyone who speaks lashon harah is as if he has totally rejected G-d Himself (kafar b’ikar).’” Rav Chisda said in the name of Mar Ukba that: “Anyone who speaks lashon harah is fitting to be put to death by stoning,” a punishment, it should be noted, that is shared by purposeful (i.e. knowledgeable) Shabbat violators. A second statement by Rav Chisda in the name of Mar Ukba is even more powerful: “Anyone who speaks lashon harah - Hakadosh Baruch Hu (the Holy One Blessed Be He) Himself declares:’ He and I are unable to dwell in the same world!’” Perhaps it is the following statement from the Yeshiva of Rabbi Yishmael, however, that most succinctly summarizes the ultimate gravity of this sin: “It was taught in the Yeshiva of Rabbi Yishmael: ‘Anyone who speaks lashon harah magnifies his sins corresponding to the three [cardinal] sins of idol worship, illicit physical relations, and murder.’” (Translations my own) As Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 74a teaches us: these three transgressions are deemed to be so horrendous that they may never be violated – even to save one’s life:

R. Johanan said in the name of R. Simeon b. Jehozadak: By a majority vote, it was resolved in the upper chambers of the house of Nithza in Lydda that in every [other] law of the Torah, if a man is commanded: 'Transgress and suffer not death' he may transgress and not suffer death, excepting idolatry, incest, [which includes adultery] and murder. (Soncino Talmud translation)

Given these sources, it is crucial to recognize that the above passages in Talmud Bavli, Arakin 15b, are far more than sermonic statements meant to dissuade us from the grievous sin of speaking lashon harah. Instead, they have deep and abiding halachic (Jewish legal) significance. The Rambam (1135-1204) utilized this daf (folio), among a number of other sources, when he formulated his piskei din (halachic decisions) in this fundamental area of Jewish law. Given the vital nature of these halachot (laws), it is essential for us to briefly review them.

Maimonides places the laws regarding the prohibition of lashon harah in Sefer Hama’ada at the end of Hilchot Deiot. He summarizes the Talmudic discussion regarding this topic in a number of clearly and precisely stated halachot. The first halacha (law) deals with the general prohibition of tale-bearing (rechilut), of which lashon harah is a subset, as presented in Sefer Vayikra 19:16:

If one spreads tales about someone else, one is transgressing a negative commandment, for it is written, "You shall not go around as a tale-bearer amongst your people". Even though this sin is not punishable by flogging, it is nevertheless a great sin and can cause many Jewish deaths, which is why this commandment is mentioned next to that of, "...nor shall you stand aside when trouble befalls your fellow". Learn from what happened to Do'eg the Edomite. (This, and all following quotations from Hilchot Deiot are based upon O’Levy’s translation as found at: http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker/MadaD.html, with my editorial changes to enhance readability.)

The Rambam’s emphasis upon the juxtaposition of this prohibition to that of: “Lo ta’amode al dam reiecha,” (“You should not stand idly by when your fellow Jew’s life is in danger”) speaks volumes. Quite simply, as he notes, rechilut kills people, both metaphorically and in reality.

The next halacha provides us with a definitional structure for understanding the terms “rachil” (“tale-bearer”) and baal lashon harah (literally, “master of slander”). Herein, the Rambam stresses that both rechilut and lashon harah are, by definition, true. As he so clearly opines, however, this is in no way gives permission for these damaging truths to be spread. He also notes that lashon harah is actually a greater sin than rechilut:

Who counts as a tale-bearer? One who carries matters from one [person] to another and says that so-and-so did such-and-such, or that he heard such-and-such regarding so-and-so is counted as a tale-bearer. Even though what he says is true, it [still] destroys the world. There is an even greater sin, that is under the heading of tale-bearing, namely, slandering (lashon harah). This refers to one who purposefully disparages his fellow Jew even if it is the truth… a master slanderer is one who sits and says that so-and-so did such-and-such, or that his ancestors were like that, or that he heard such-and-such about him, and relates bad things. Concerning this Scripture said "May the L-rd cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaks proud things.” (Emphasis my own)

Lying (motzai shame ra), it should be noted, is also briefly mentioned by the Rambam in this halacha. Given the context, it appears that the content of this utterance, like rechilut and lashon harah, is disparaging of one’s fellow Jew. It follows the same format of evil that is present in rechilut and lashon harah. Motzai shame ra, however, departs from the truth in its attempt to destroy the individual about whom it its spoken.

The Rambam’s next halacha is a summary of some of the material found directly in the above-quoted passages in Talmud Bavli, Arakin 15b. It also contains a synopsis of the “anatomy” of lashon harah and the degrees of culpability of those involved in its transmission and reception:

The Sages said that there are three sins, which bring punishment to a person in this world and deprive him of a share in the World To Come. These sins are idolatry, adultery and murder, but slander (lashon harah) is above all. The Sages further said that slandering (lashon harah) is like denying G-d, for it is written, “Who have said, ‘With our tongue we will prevail; our lips are our own; who is lord above us?’” The Sages further said that slandering kills three people: The one who speaks the slander, the one who receives it, and the one about whom it is spoken. The one who receives the slander commits a greater sin than the one who speaks it.”

The following halacha focuses upon a category that Chazal and the Rambam label “avak lashon harah” (“indirect lashon harah”). While not said with the intent to do harm, this is, however, its result and, therefore, forbidden:

There are things which are similar to slandering. What does this mean? For example, one who says to someone else that he should be like him, or one who says that he has nothing to say about so-and-so and doesn't care what happens to him [are comparable to slanderers]. Similar things also count. Telling about someone else's goodness because one hates him is also similar to slandering, for it will cause the listeners to tell it [to other people] in a bad way. Concerning this Solomon said, “He who blesses his friend in a loud voice, rising early in the morning, shall have it counted as a curse to him,” for out of good will come bad. Similarly, concerning slandering with laughter and frivolity and showing no hatred Solomon said in his wisdom, “As a madman who throws firebrands, arrows and death, so is a man who tricks his fellow and says, “But I was only joking!” Similarly, one who slanders by swindling, i.e. by telling to his surprise as if he doesn't know that what he is saying is slandering and that when he is rebuked he says that he didn't know that it was slandering, or that so-and-so also does it [is also like a slanderer].

The final law in this series deals with the social-halachic ramifications of living and dealing with people who are engaged in speaking lashon harah on an ongoing basis. As one would suspect, the Rambam prohibits dwelling among such people. He also pointedly reminds us that the fate of the Dor Hamidbar (Generation of the Desert) was not sealed until they had listened to and accepted the lashon harah of the Meraglim (Spies): “It is forbidden to live in a neighborhood of tale-bearers, and how much more so sit with them and listen to what they say. Moreover, the Divine decree against our forefathers in the desert was sealed solely because of slander.”

May Hashem grant us the wisdom to be honest with ourselves when we examine our speech against the yardstick of these halachot. We must always be aware that if Miriam, the great prophetess could err, all the more so can we. May He grant us, as well, the si’ata d’shamaya (Divine protection) to help us strive for purity in our speech. If we can achieve this lofty goal, it will be one more way in which we can truly love and respect our fellow Jews. V’chane yihi ratzon.

Shabbat Shalom

Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org

The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email rdbe718@gmail.com.